Pinned

President Trump declared on Tuesday that the United States should seize control of Gaza and permanently displace the entire Palestinian population of the devastated seaside enclave, one of the most brazen ideas that any American leader has advanced in years.

Hosting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel at the White House, Mr. Trump said that all two million Palestinians from Gaza should be moved to countries like Egypt and Jordan because of the devastation wrought by Israel’s campaign against Hamas after the terrorist attack of Oct. 7, 2023.

“The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it too,” Mr. Trump said at a news conference Tuesday evening. “We’ll own it and be responsible” for disposing of unexploded munitions and rebuilding Gaza into a mecca for jobs and tourism. Sounding like the real estate developer he once was, Mr. Trump vowed to turn it into “the Riviera of the Middle East.”

While the president framed the matter as a humanitarian imperative and an economic development opportunity, he effectively reopened a geopolitical Pandora’s box with far-reaching implications for the Middle East. Control over Gaza has been one of the major flash points of the Arab-Israeli conflict for decades, and the idea of relocating its Palestinian residents recalls an era when great Western powers redrew the maps of the region and moved around populations without regard to local autonomy.

The notion of the United States taking over territory in the Middle East would be a dramatic reversal for Mr. Trump, who first ran for office in 2016 vowing to extract America from the region after the Iraq war and decried the nation-building of his predecessors. In unveiling the plan, Mr. Trump did not cite any legal authority giving him the right to take over the territory, nor did he address the fact that forcible removal of a population violates international law and decades of American foreign policy consensus in both parties.

He made the proposal even as the United States was seeking to secure the Israel-Hamas cease-fire’s second phase, which is designed to free the remaining hostages in Gaza and bring a permanent end to the fighting. Negotiators had described their task as exceptionally difficult even before Mr. Trump announced his idea of ousting Palestinians from their homes.

Hamas, which has ruled in Gaza for most of the past two decades and is re-establishing control there now, immediately rejected mass relocation on Tuesday, and Egypt and Jordan have rejected the idea of taking in a large influx of Palestinians, given the fraught history, burden and destabilizing potential.

Sami Abu Zuhri, a senior Hamas official, said that Mr. Trump’s proposed relocation was “a recipe for creating chaos and tension in the region.”

“Our people in Gaza will not allow for these plans to come to pass,” he said in a statement distributed by Hamas. “What is needed is the end of the occupation and the aggression against our people, not expelling them from their land.”

Mr. Trump waved aside the opposition from Arab countries like Egypt and Jordan, suggesting that his powers of persuasion would convince them.

“They say they’re not going to accept,” Mr. Trump said during an earlier meeting with Mr. Netanyahu in the Oval Office. “I say they will.”

Mr. Netanyahu, sitting at Mr. Trump’s side, smiled with satisfaction as the president first outlined his ideas. Later, during the joint news conference, the Israeli prime minister heaped praise on Mr. Trump.

“You cut to the chase,” Mr. Netanyahu told Mr. Trump. “You see things others refuse to see. You say things others refuse to say, and after the jaws dropped, people scratch their heads and they say, ‘you know, he’s right.’”

“This is the kind of thinking that will reshape the Middle East and bring peace,” he added.

In his remarks, Mr. Trump insisted that Palestinians would quickly warm to his idea.

“I don’t think people should be going back to Gaza,” Mr. Trump said. “I heard that Gaza has been very unlucky for them. They live like hell. They live like they’re living in hell. Gaza is not a place for people to be living, and the only reason they want to go back, and I believe this strongly, is because they have no alternative.”

He suggested that nations in the region could finance the resettlement of Gazans to new places — perhaps “a good, fresh, beautiful piece of land” — that would provide better living conditions, either as a single territory or as many as a dozen. “It would be my hope that we could do something really nice, really good, where they wouldn’t want to return,” he said without offering details of what that would entail.

Asked how many Palestinians he had in mind, he said, “all of them,” adding, “I would think that they would be thrilled.” Pressed repeatedly on whether he would force them to go even if they did not want to, Mr. Trump said, “I don’t think they’re going to tell me no.”

Image Mr. Trump’s hosting of Mr. Netanyahu was his first in-person meeting with another world leader since his return to power two weeks ago. Credit… Eric Lee/The New York Times

Gaza has a long and tortured history of conflict and crisis. Many Gazans are descendants of Palestinians who were forced out of their homes during the 1948 war after Israel’s independence, an event known around the Arab world as the Nakba, or catastrophe. Now Mr. Trump is suggesting that they be displaced again, even though the Geneva Conventions — international agreements that the United States and Israel both ratified — bar forcible relocation of populations.

Egypt captured Gaza during the 1948 war and controlled it until Israel seized it, along with other Palestinian territory, in a 1967 war against a coalition of Arab nations seeking to destroy the Jewish state. Palestinians in Gaza waged violent resistance for years afterward, and Israel eventually withdrew from Gaza in 2005.

But within two years, Hamas, an avowed enemy of Israel that the United States and other nations have designated a terrorist group, took control of the enclave and used it as a base for war against Israel.

For years, Israel blockaded Gaza while Hamas fired rockets and staged terrorist attacks, culminating in the October 2023 operation that killed 1,200 people and led to the capture of 250 more. Israel retaliated with an unrelenting military operation that killed more than 47,000 people, according to Gazan health officials, whose count does not distinguish between civilians and combatants.

In the weeks since a cease-fire that President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s administration negotiated and that Mr. Trump pushed came into effect, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who were repeatedly displaced throughout the war have returned to their homes in Gaza to find them and their communities demolished. Steve Witkoff, Mr. Trump’s Middle East envoy, visited Gaza last week and said it would take 10 to 15 years to reconstruct.

“If you had damage that was one-hundredth of what I saw in Gaza, nobody would be allowed to go back to their homes,” Mr. Witkoff told reporters on Tuesday. “That’s how dangerous it is. There’s 30,000 unexploded munitions. It is buildings that could tip over at any moment. There’s no utilities.”

Picking up on the theme later in the day, Mr. Trump said it was not realistic to have Palestinians return to Gaza. “They have no alternative right now” but to leave, Mr. Trump told reporters before Mr. Netanyahu’s arrival.

“I mean, they’re there because they have no alternative,” he said. “What do they have? It is a big pile of rubble right now.” He added: “I don’t know how they could want to stay. It’s a demolition site. It’s a pure demolition site.”

Mr. Trump suggested the resettlement of Palestinians would be akin to the New York real estate projects he built his career on. “If we could find the right piece of land, or numerous pieces of land, and build them some really nice places with plenty of money in the area, that’s for sure,” he said. “I think that would be a lot better than going back to Gaza.”

“I do see a long-term ownership position” for the United States, Mr. Trump said, adding that “everybody I’ve spoken to loves the idea of the United States owning that piece of land, developing and creating thousands of jobs with something that will be magnificent.”

Mr. Trump’s summit with Mr. Netanyahu was his first in-person meeting with another world leader since his return to power two weeks ago. It was part of a multiday visit to Washington by Mr. Netanyahu that was meant to demonstrate the close ties between the two leaders.

Mr. Trump and Mr. Netanyahu forged a close partnership during the president’s first term but fell out toward its end over a number of issues, including the Israeli leader’s willingness to congratulate Mr. Biden on his victory in the 2020 election, which Mr. Trump insists he won. Mr. Trump and Mr. Netanyahu have since sought to smooth over their rift.

But Mr. Netanyahu went into his meeting at odds with Mr. Trump on several important issues, according to analysts, likely including how to confront Iran’s nuclear ambitions and how quickly to end the war in Gaza.

The Trump administration has made clear that it wants to see all of the hostages held by Hamas returned and then move on to a grand bargain involving Saudi Arabia that formalizes relations with Israel.

Saudi Arabia reiterated support for an independent Palestinian state on Tuesday and said forging ties with Israel would depend on the creation of such a state.

Advisers to Mr. Trump told reporters on Tuesday morning that the president and Mr. Netanyahu were united behind the idea that Hamas should not be allowed to remain in power.

With Mr. Netanyahu’s right-wing government in jeopardy if the war ends with Hamas still in control in Gaza, and with no other plan for the area in place, analysts expect the Israeli prime minister to try to delay moving toward a permanent cease-fire.

“Netanyahu made this salami deal,” said Shira Efron, the senior director of policy research at the Israel Policy Forum, a New York-based research group, referring to the three-phased agreement with Hamas. “He’s always playing for time and kicking the can down the road.”

Adding to the anxiety in the region were reports on Monday that U.S. intelligence officials believe Iran is seeking to build a cruder atomic weapon that could be developed quickly if the leadership in Tehran decided to do so.

It remains unclear whether that decision has been made, and Iran’s new president has indicated that he would like to begin a negotiation with Mr. Trump’s administration even as the country’s nuclear scientists push ahead with their efforts.

Mr. Trump on Tuesday signed an order directing a return to the policy of “maximum pressure” on Iran through sanctions, but avoided hostile language and refused to say whether he would support an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, an indication of his interest in reaching an agreement. “This is one I’m torn about,” he said as he signed the order. “Hopefully, we’re not going to have to use it very much.”

Edward Wong contributed reporting from Washington, and Adam Rasgon from Jerusalem. Ephrat Livni contributed research.

Care workers with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) rally outside the U.S. Capitol on June 26, 2025, in Washington, D.C. They came to denounce the impact to patients, families and workers if Republicans cut Medicaid, health care and SNAP to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy. (Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for SEIU)

Colorado State Treasurer Dave Young’s sister Dorothy has relied heavily on Medicaid “for health care and for life-sustaining support” as she lives with severe cognitive and physical disabilities.

“It really has been a true lifeline for the entire family,” Young said in a press call Thursday. “We have tried to provide care for my sister, and her needs are so demanding, so extreme, that a family by itself can’t manage to make this work. We need help, we need support, we’ve thrown ourselves into this to the extent that we can, but many, many other families are in similar situations.”

Young said that when Medicaid cuts hit Colorado in the past, the state could no longer provide residential care for his sister. She went through 20 different residential facilities in a span of 18 months, all of which were “inadequate” because they did not have proper funding, he said.

“Often, she was ejected from a placement because she overwhelmed the providers, sometimes without even a phone call,” Young said.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Young and financial officials from four other Democratic-led states participated in a call hosted by Americans for Responsible Growth, a national advocacy group that works with state financial leaders. They warned about how Republicans’ recent policy law, called by President Donald Trump the “big, beautiful bill,” will negatively affect Medicaid and Medicare recipients ahead of the 60th anniversary of the programs.

The law cuts more than $1 trillion from Medicaid, a state-federal health insurance program for people with low incomes.

Dave Wallack, executive director of Americans for Responsible Growth, said that since the Trump administration took office, Republicans have “systematically gutted health care programs, fired thousands of federal workers, and slashed more than a trillion dollars for Medicaid, the largest cut in the program’s history.”

Wallack said the cuts will lead to 17 million Americans losing health care coverage and more than 50,000 preventable deaths annually. Young said in Colorado, more than 375,000 recipients could lose Medicaid coverage. Democratic officials from New Mexico, Illinois, Minnesota and Maryland all said that rural communities in their states will be hit hardest by the cuts, and they will feel the effects first.

Rural hospitals at risk

Laura Montoya, the New Mexico state treasurer, said her state is the No. 1 recipient state for Medicaid in the nation, and 80% of the babies born in New Mexico are born into Medicaid. She said the federal law’s changes to Medicaid will “force hospitals and clinics to either raise premiums or copays or shut down entirely,” and 15 hospitals in rural communities are already at risk of closing their doors.

“Our state’s entire provider network depends on the state’s current Medicaid coverage landscape,” Montoya said. “These cuts will increase health care costs for all New Mexicans regardless of Medicaid enrollment, not to mention more uninsured individuals could end up skipping preventative care leading to worsened health outcomes, higher cost for emergency care, and more crowded emergency rooms and urgent care facilities, placing even more strain on an already overwhelmed system.”

The shift of responsibility for states to fund Medicaid could also destabilize New Mexico’s entire support network, including housing assistance, early childhood education, public safety and economic development, Montoya said. The New Mexico Legislature passed a measure creating a Medicaid trust fund to safeguard services amid federal cuts, she added.

Illinois State Treasurer Michael Frerichs said 44% of the Medicaid recipients in his state are children, 9% are seniors, and 7% are adults with disabilities. Nine rural hospitals in Illinois, all in Republican districts, are at risk of closing because of funding cuts, he said.

“When hospitals close and health care providers cut back, people lose their jobs. They lose their income, and their health insurance,” Frerichs said. “Illinois’ economy will be destabilized. The cruel, inhumane Trump big bad budget bill will wreak havoc across Illinois for years to come.”

Julie Blaha, Minnesota’s state auditor, said about 25% of Minnesotans are enrolled in the state’s Medicaid program, which also supports 30% of births. For Black and Indigenous communities, those numbers are even higher: The state’s medical assistance program covers 80% of Black babies born in the state and 90% of Indigenous babies.

Blaha said it is more cost-efficient to keep people on these health care programs in a stable place, as it’s more expensive “to pull somebody up who’s fallen through.”

“It is time to stand up and tell Congress and tell Trump to roll back these terrible cuts and try to stop the avalanche before it crushes us all,” Blaha said.

Brooke Lierman, the Maryland state comptroller, said 42% of her state’s population is supported by Medicaid or Medicare. She said the two programs were designed to take care of “vulnerable Americans” who would be “sicker and worse off” without the coverage they provide.

“These programs are economic powerhouses that drive prosperity in our communities and strengthen our state’s fiscal foundation,” Lierman said. “Cutting Medicaid is both fiscally reckless and morally bankrupt, abandoning our most vulnerable residents, including our seniors and people with disabilities, while destroying the economic foundation that so many of our communities depend on.”

‘Among the greatest policy achievements’

Health care is a “major economic driver” in Colorado, Young said, as hospitals employ about 1 in 5 Colorado residents and generate $1 billion in tax revenue yearly. Reduced federal investment in health care will lead to clinic closures and reduced tax revenue that will affect quality of life for “Coloradans of every age and income bracket,” he said.

“Colorado cannot afford to downsize our health care sector,” Young said. “We’re already facing dire workforce and health care shortages, especially in rural and frontier communities. The state can’t make up for these losses either.”

Medicaid and Medicare are “among the greatest policy achievements in American history,” Young said, as the programs strengthen health care systems and lift people out of poverty. He said the programs can be strengthened while saving money, but “this slash and burn technique” will be “devastating.”

“When people get the care they need, they hold down jobs, they provide for their families and avoid catastrophic medical debt,” Young said.

SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

When Gov. Wes Moore of Maryland signs his state’s budget into law as soon as Tuesday, it will signify the end of a difficult saga in which local leaders cut spending and raised some fees just to close a larger-than-expected $3 billion deficit.

But Mr. Moore, a Democrat, is already bracing for the next fiscal fight. Maryland and its finances are highly influenced by the federal government, and the Trump administration is looking to cut vast swaths of the aid it sends to states.

“We just made in Maryland the largest cuts to our budget in 16 years,” Mr. Moore said in a recent interview, adding that the steep cuts being contemplated in Washington could quickly prove “deeply damaging.”

Across the country, state leaders are beginning to express alarm about the budgetary fallout from President Trump’s economic agenda, warning that they will not be able to pick up the bill if the federal government reduces its funding for major public services. To governors and other officials, many of whom are Democrats, the fear is that Washington could sharply curtail federal programs that help states improve their infrastructure, respond to natural disasters, expand education and provide a suite of health, housing and nutrition benefits to the poor.

A bird flies near the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 25, 2025. REUTERS/Nathan Howard Purchase Licensing Rights , opens new tab

Item 1 of 2 A bird flies near the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 25, 2025. REUTERS/Nathan Howard

Summary Medicaid and SNAP face potential spending cuts under proposed tax plan

Education and labor cuts could impact public schools, Pell Grants

Social Security remains untouched, but future funding concerns persist

WASHINGTON, Feb 26 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s Republicans are trying to pass a tax cut extension that would reduce federal revenue by about $4.5 trillion over the next decade, while cutting about $2 trillion in spending over that timeline.

The plan, which is now under consideration in the Senate after the House of Representatives passed a measure advancing it, does not currently include much detail of where spending will be cut. But it offers some clues and Democrats and advocates warn that social programs, including Medicaid and food aid for low-income Americans, could be targets.

Sign up here.

Republicans hold narrow majorities in the House and Senate and are attempting to push as much of Trump’s agenda through without the support of the Democrats, although the Senate may make some changes and Democratic votes could be needed on aspects of this plan should some Republicans defect.

HOW WILL FEDERAL HEALTH INSURANCE BE IMPACTED?

House Republicans directed the committee that oversees the federal health insurance programs Medicaid and Medicare, which serve elderly Americans, to find some $880 billion in spending cuts over 10 years.

The federal government spent about $607 billion on Medicaid alone in the fiscal year ended Sept. 30. The program was expanded under the 2010 Affordable Care Act to guarantee more citizens’ coverage, and the Department of Health and Human Services estimates some 45 million people rely on that expanded coverage.

Republicans say they cut healthcare spending by targeting waste and fraud. Federal agencies reported $236 billion in improper payments in the 2023 fiscal year, with the bulk of it coming in claims for Medicaid, Medicare and unemployment payments, according to the Government Accountability Office , opens new tab

Democrats say that cutting fraud alone is unlikely to generate the volume of savings needed, contending that the cuts will likely force states to bear the burden of reimbursing healthcare providers and may leave many vulnerable patients uninsured, unable to afford medical treatments and strapped with medical debt.

Over 79 million Americans were enrolled in Medicaid or the Child Health Insurance Program known as “CHIP” as of October 2024.

WHAT ABOUT FOOD ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS?

The House plan orders the Agriculture Committee to find $230 billion in spending cuts over 10 years, which Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and House Budget Committee Democrats like Representative Brendan Boyle have warned could target the SNAP food aid program for low-income Americans.

SNAP cost the government $112 billion in fiscal year 2023 and gave some 42 million Americans an average of $211 monthly for food, according to Department of Agriculture data. Children make up more than a third of SNAP participants.

Cuts would force states to pick up the slack on food assistance. If states lack the resources to meet the population’s needs, they could tighten eligibility requirements or remove people from the program as a result.

WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO LOCAL SCHOOLS?

The plan calls for $330 billion over ten years in cuts in education and labor, notable as Trump has also called for outright closing of the Department of Education

If he succeeds, federal grants for public schools and programs in poor communities could suffer. Also unclear: whether schools’ curricula would meet national standards, what would happen to the $1.6 trillion in student loans the agency oversees and whether protections against sex discrimination in education would wither.

In fiscal year 2024, the department received $79 billion in federal funding to oversee around 100,000 public and 34,000 private schools.

The popular $30 million Pell Grant program that helps low-income students pay for college with grants ranging from a minimum of $740 to a maximum $7,395 in the 2025-2026 academic year could face cuts.

WHAT ABOUT THE ‘THIRD RAIL’ SOCIAL SECURITY PROGRAM?

Trump campaigned on a promise of not cutting the Social Security or Medicare programs for the elderly.

Social Security is the largest single item in the federal budget, accounting for over 20% of expenditures.

In fiscal year 2024, $1.5 trillion was spent on the program.

The federal pension and disability program currently serves around 73 million people and is growing with the aging “Baby Boomer” population. It is known as the “third rail” in American politics: Touch it by cutting benefits and you will get electrocuted because it is so popular

That said, the House Budget Committee last year and some senators separately weighed the establishment of a “fiscal commission” to study ways to stop the dramatic growth in the national debt, which now stands at $36.5 trillion. Such an effort would be separate from Congress’ regular budget and appropriations process, depending on how such a commission was structured.

Without a replenishment of the Social Security Trust Fund, it will run out of reserves in 2037 or even sooner, meaning benefits could be cut by some 24% as tax revenues would then provide the only source of income. Heading that off could mean raising the retirement age or making other savings in the shorter-term.

Reporting by Gabriella Borter and Richard Cowan; Editing by Scott Malone and Aurora Ellis

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Share X

Facebook

Linkedin

Email

Link Purchase Licensing Rights